Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: The actual truth is that ... industry standard stipulative
 definitions
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 18:09:14 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <491c00831ebf446c6420485722f7db2da67af9fb@i2pn2.org>
References: <ve39pb$24k00$1@dont-email.me> <vedb3s$3g3a$1@dont-email.me>
	<vedibm$4891$2@dont-email.me>
	<72315c1456c399b2121b3fffe90b933be73e39b6@i2pn2.org>
	<vee6s1$7l0f$1@dont-email.me>
	<1180775691cf24be4a082676bc531877147202e3@i2pn2.org>
	<veec23$8jnq$1@dont-email.me>
	<c81fcbf97a35bd428495b0e70f3b54e545e8ae59@i2pn2.org>
	<vef37r$bknp$2@dont-email.me>
	<7e79306e9771378b032e6832548eeef7429888c4@i2pn2.org>
	<veikaf$14fb3$1@dont-email.me> <veipmb$15764$2@dont-email.me>
	<c56fcfcf793d65bebd7d17db4fccafd1b8dea072@i2pn2.org>
	<vejfg0$1879f$3@dont-email.me>
	<bde5947ebdcfb62ecd6e8968052cb3a25c4b1fec@i2pn2.org>
	<vekfi5$1d7rn$1@dont-email.me>
	<6d73c2d966d1d04dcef8f7f9e0c849e17bd73352@i2pn2.org>
	<velnqn$1n3gb$3@dont-email.me>
	<b06c4952248d83881642c7d84207d3d39c56c59f@i2pn2.org>
	<vend90$22rqh$1@dont-email.me> <vens4t$250b2$1@dont-email.me>
	<veos78$29dtl$7@dont-email.me>
	<97040a77da33a22295b056e260c896fd96f1ac94@i2pn2.org>
	<veotuk$2baph$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2024 18:09:14 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2247835"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="nS1KMHaUuWOnF/ukOJzx6Ssd8y16q9UPs1GZ+I3D0CM";
User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a
 git.gnome.org/pan2)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 3893
Lines: 38

Am Wed, 16 Oct 2024 12:42:43 -0500 schrieb olcott:
> On 10/16/2024 12:24 PM, joes wrote:
>> Am Wed, 16 Oct 2024 12:13:12 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 10/16/2024 3:05 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-10-16 03:52:00 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>> On 10/15/2024 9:11 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/15/24 8:39 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/15/2024 4:58 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>>>>> Am Mon, 14 Oct 2024 20:12:37 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>>> On 10/14/2024 6:50 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 10/14/24 12:05 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 10/14/2024 6:21 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

>>>>>>>>>> But, you claim to be working on that Halting Problem,
>>>>>>>>> I quit claiming this many messages ago and you didn't bother to
>>>>>>>>> notice.
>>>>>>>> Can you please give the date and time? Did you also explicitly
>>>>>>>> disclaim it or just silently leave it out?
>>>>>>> Even people of low intelligence that are not trying to be as
>>>>>>> disagreeable as possible would be able to notice that a specified
>>>>>>> C function is not a Turing machine.
>>>>>> But it needs to be computationally equivalent to one to ask about
>>>>>> Termination.
>>>>> A termination analyzer need not be a Turing computable function.
>>>> There is no known way to construct one that isn't. No computer can
>>>> execute a function that is not Turing computable.
>>> In other words you think that functions that rely on global data such
>>> that they are not a pure function of their inputs are A OK?
>> Says the one with an if(Root).
>> Apart from that, purity has nothing to do with computability.
> Quite a few experts agree that the purity of a function ensures its
> computability. It was like pulling teeth to get this out of them. It was
> like the computer science experts desperately wanted to remain totally
> ignorant of mapping computer science to software engineering.
Decide_Halting() is not pure.

-- 
Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math:
It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.